  |
はてなキーワード: RESTとは
ChatGPT:
はい、Delphi（Object Pascal）のソースも読めますし、解説・リファクタ・バグ箇所の指摘・他言語への移植案など対応できます。
VCL / FMX、Generics、Interface/RTTI、プロパティ/イベント、レコード・セット型、メモリ管理（string/AnsiString/UnicodeString の違い）、スレッド（TThread / TTask）、WinAPI/COM 呼び出し、uses 単位構成、.dfm（フォーム）やリソース周りもOKです。
コードを貼ってくれれば、1ステップずつ説明や改善案を出します（DelphiのバージョンやVCL/FMXも書いてあると精度上がります）。
UNIFACEはどう？
ChatGPT:
はい、UNIFACE（Proc言語）も対応できます。フォーム/サービス/レポート/エンティティなど各コンポーネントのトリガ（initialize, validate, leave field など）、operation／entry、newinstance/activate/call、retrieve/e, read, write、エラー制御（$status, $procerror）や論理名・assignment(.asn)、署名/パラメータ、DSP/REST・SOAP連携、DBドライバ設定までOKです。
コードや .asn を貼っていただければ、処理フローの解説、バグ箇所の指摘、リファクタ、他言語・他フレームワークへの移植案（例：REST API化、Java/Python 置き換え）まで具体的にやります。
可能なら UNIFACE のバージョン（9/10/10.4 など）、DB（Oracle/SQL Server 等）、OS を添えてください。
いや、まずさ、某証券会社のインターフェイス。使いにくすぎるんだよね
なんで登録時に証券口座だけじゃなく、銀行口座を同時に2つも作らされるのかよくわからないし (オプトアウトするもんなのかもわからんし)
んで、某国産SNS。普通、RESTでも何でも良いけど、APIインターフェイスがはっきりしてたらアプリ版のあとにWeb版を実装するなんてのは簡単な話なのよ
要するに、インターフェイス(APIもUIも含む)の設計がクソなんだよね
複雑なごちゃごちゃしたものを作れる能力があるから、自頭は良いし実装力はあるんだろう
駆け出しはなるべく早く一人前になるか技術を背景にPMとかにシフトしてくとかしないと厳しいでこの世界
昔っからそうだしReactがRESTかけます！でもJavaでクラスかけます！でも同じ
https://laylo.com/laylo-conjuring4nghilecuoicung/XkU4F652
https://laylo.com/laylo-thecatngonthuhai/qpOT6DjQ
https://laylo.com/laylo-thecatngonthuhai/dya4lHlo
https://laylo.com/laylo-tiemcamocochoicochiu/HvMuvLeO
There is an epidemic of people misunderstanding what hit points are and why you gain them. This rant/explanation is fueled by an argument I had with one of my players and too many comments on DnD streams where people misunderstand HP. The only part of your HP that determines how much damage you can physically withstand is the Con modifier you add, the rolled HP is combat experience, luck and mental fortitude. Let me explain.
A lvl 20 Goliath Barbarian at full heath gets stabbed in the head with with a simple 1d6 sword. That Goliath is dead, gaining HP isn’t becoming tough enough to survive a sword to your goddamn cranium, it’s gaining enough combat experience that you’re able to avoid the deadly blow and instead only suffer a cut in your arm.
This is the entire concept of sneak attack and critical hits. The rogue isn’t suddenly hitting you harder than normal, they’re slipping past your defenses to deal the realistic damage of you getting stabbed in the kidney. When you crit you aren’t hitting harder than you were before you’re landing a solid hit that your opponent is having a harder time avoiding.
This is why your rolled HP is dependent on your class and not your race, and why martial classes have the highest hit die. A knife in the gut is a much more dangerous when you’re a gnome than when you’re a Goliath unless the gnome is a fighter and the Goliath is a wizard. One has much more combat experience than the other and is able to avoid the deadlier hit.
Edit: again this is also why you heal to full HP after a long rest. You aren’t magically healing hundreds of cuts on your body, you’re becoming rested enough that you’re able to avoid that dagger to your neck.
Edit 2: I avoid taking about spells because magic is fucking weird.
Also poison damage. It’s about how much poison/venom is actually able to get into your system before you’re able to pull back and avoid it.
そこそこ大企業に勤めてる
ソフトウェアエンジニアをしてるが、彼らはもうダメなのかもしれない。
OSが存在する時点で無駄なウィルススキャンソフトを入れさせられる。
いわゆるサーバーレスが大好きな人たちが集まって作ったゴミシステムの改修をさせられてる。
頭が沸いてるとしか思えない。。
当然NoSQLでは複雑な検索ができないので検索エンジンを使っている。。
彼ら自身が答えを出してるのに素直ではない。
なぜかgraphqlも採用している。
内部を見ても、普通にrestのコントローラーと同じ構造をしていてgraphqlのサービスに依存して返す値を変えてるだけである。。、
で、離職率が90%を超えている
擬似的にリレーションは再現できるであろうが、アプリケーション層での保証なのに問題ない顔している。
今わたしは外注を動かすためにシステムの仕様を作って、渡してる。
サーバーレスなアプリケーションでスマホアプリはそれらを呼び出している。
流石に工数見積もりができないのでスケジュール遅延する可能性が高いとPMに報告したが普通に怒られた。当たり散らされたがまあくだらないので放っておく。
上に相談したが耐えてくれとの話だった。
PMはSIer出身でこのプロジェクトはアジャイルと言い張るがガッツリウォーターフォールである。
このシステムはやばいからユーザー関連部分だけでもRDBMSに移行すべきと言ったが、工数が無いとしか言わない。
現代でソフトウェアを作る上ではもうdevops以前に協働するという基礎の方が大事である。
他社の機能をパクれと言ってもウチ独自の強みがないととか、そのアプリで出せる付加価値があると認められてから投資対象になると説明されるが、こいつらは何を食ってるんだろうか。
壊しやすく自分の手で扱える規模にアプリケーションを組んで激安で運用して当たるのを待てばいいのにそれも出来ない。
このシステムを冷静にレビューしても狂ってるのに誰一人疑問に思わない。。
上は無関心、PMは働かないでASDっぽいし人を詰める、同僚はASD
こんな魔境存在していいのか。。と疑問に思う。
横だけど
毎回毎回 SELECTしてチェックしてるの？
これはビジネスロジック次第
ORMなので子・親データがどうかとかの単純なチェックはそのレイヤーでやられてて
それ以外に複雑なビジネスロジック上のチェックが相当ある
削除するときどうするの？
RESTだけどDELETEのエンドポイントはかなり限られてる
親子は通常ORM
金融系ではないし規模も小さいのでDB上コード上で設計的にキャッチするようにして見逃されたのは仕方がないという方針
ただしデータ取る時に不正なものがあれば無視せずわざと不正終了するようにしてるので割とすぐユーザーから問題が上がるようになってる
2025年8月9日 UKFC on the Road 2025 ‐15th ANNIVERSARY‐DAY1@Zepp Haneda
連勤続き(ライジング行くから休みがない)で体調悪いし早く行くのがダルくなっていたけどAge Factoryを観たい気持ちが大きかったので頑張って開演に間に合うように会場へ向かう。Age Factoryと椿屋の時間帯は2階席抽選当たったので(シロップは外れた…そうだとは思ったけどめちゃくちゃ萎えた笑)とりあえずは座れるのが嬉しい笑 会場着いてスタッフの方にリスバン付けてもらったんだけど、スタッフの方がキツくないですか？楽しんで来て下さい！ってめちゃくちゃ丁寧な対応で感動した…。この暑い中、すごい人数相手にするのにありがとうございます…。早々に2階席へ入ったらまだ一番前の真ん中辺りが空いてたのでそこで座って待機。ふかふかのソファみたいな席でびっくりした。小説を読んで開演までひたすら時間を潰す。
きっちり定刻にスタート。
今回、観るのを一番楽しみにしてたバンド(シロップじゃないんかいってツッコミはなしでお願いします…)3ピースだけどサポートギター入れてるのは予習で知ってたので演奏に関しては安心(？)だろうと思ってたけど、ああやって聴くと如何に3ピースが音源を再現して演奏して歌うのが難しいかってのがよく分かった。いつも五十嵐さんのギターとかに文句言ってるけどすごい頑張ってるんだなぁ…(失礼過ぎる感想だけど)セットリストは定番なのかは分からないけど(夏感あるセットリストだな〜とは思った)私が好きな曲ばっかりで最高。Peaceめちゃくちゃ良い曲だし、OVERとBlood in blue、Everynightも聴けて嬉しい。ただ、ドラムがちょっと苦手な系統のドラムだったのと演奏が思ってた感じとちょっと違ったのでそうかーって感じはあったかも。ドラム上手いんだけど…私が苦手な感じが全面に出てて…。ライブの後改めて聴くとライブでああ言うドラムなのそりゃそうだよなって思ったり。でも沢山聴きたい曲聴けたしすごく楽しかった。フロアのノリはどんな感じなのかな？と思ってちょいちょい覗いてたけど拳を突き上げる感じでAge Factoryのファンって若いのでは…？？そうでもないのかな…？同世代ではないと思うんだけど…最近また拳の時代が来たのか…？？有識者、教えて欲しい。
1.rest/息
2.Yellow
3.Peace
4.向日葵
5.OVER
8.Everynight
とりあえずアートまで暇なのでご飯食べたり飛行機観たりして時間を潰す。喉が渇いたのでドリンク交換の為にライブハウスに戻ったついでにフロアの中入っとくか〜と思ったら丁度からあげ弁当の演奏が始まる所だったので観ることに。
若い感じ炸裂で熱めの真っ直ぐな音楽がババアには眩し過ぎる。しかし最近の若者は演奏上手いなぁ…。あとMCが面白い。僕がイェーイって言ったらフゥ〜↑↑って言ってもらって良いですか！？って言ってたり皆手を上げて欲しい！→皆手を上げる→今、写真撮ってください！盛り上がってる様に見える！って下りめちゃくちゃ笑った。「最後に大好きなsyrup16gさんのRebornと言う曲のカバーを…(めちゃくちゃざわつく)賛否両論あると思うし正直面識がないんで失礼な事も分かってます、でも大好きなので曲なのでやらして下さい！」ってMCからのReborn、ああ言う形で聴くと改めて良い曲だなぁと思うと同時に音源通りの歌い方に違和感を感じてしまう…笑 シロップの曲をああ言う形で聴けるのは珍しいので嬉しかった。
ステージ全然見えないけどもう聴ければ何でも良いや…って感じだったのでとりあえず適当に後方で待つ。リハでBOY MEETS GlRLとジェニファー'88をフルで演奏してビビる。やる気がすごい。しかし木下さんめちゃくちゃ声戻ってきてるなぁ…。一時期の酷い時は居た堪れなくなって聴いてられないぐらいだったのに…本当に良かった。相変わらず中憲のベースがムキムキで笑う。アートのベースにしてはムキムキ感すごいのよ…笑 でもやっぱり藤田さんと中憲のリズム隊はめちゃくちゃテンション上がる。新譜からも何曲か聴けたの嬉しかったし、スカーレットとUNDER MY SKINはいつ聴いてもテンション上がる。たまーにちらっと中憲が見えたんだけど、めちゃくちゃ強そうだった笑 全体的に大きいしアートで弾いてる時は結構暴れてるから…。戸高さんが「ART-SCHOOLは25周年ですが、ここまで続けてこれたのは大袈裟じゃなくUKPROJECTのお陰です」って言っててちょっと感動。木下さんが「UKFCも15周年なんですよね、お、おめでとう…ござ…います…」とちょい噛みで言ってて笑いが起こっていた…笑 終わった後、近くを歩いてた人が「左耳終わったわ〜」って話してて割と爆音だったんだなと思った。位置的に真ん中辺りにいたのもあるけど爆音に対しては少し耐性があるのかもしれない(LOSALIOSは大体耳がぼよーんってなるけど…)
リハでBOY MEETS GIRL、ジェニファー'88
1.Bug
3.スカーレット
4.1985
5.Just Kids
7.Outsider
8.UNDER MY SKIN
9.FADE TO BLACK
本当に久しぶりに見た中田さんは相変わらずスタイル良くてイケメンで驚く…。リハでルビーの指輪とLOVERを演奏して悲鳴が上がるもサビ前で終わる笑 しかもLOVERSは本編で演奏しなかった笑 初っ端から群青で悲鳴がすごい。懐かし過ぎてめちゃくちゃテンション上がった。しかし中田さん、相変わらず歌もギターもめちゃくちゃに上手い。若い頃は分かんなかったけど3ピースであの演奏出来てたのリズム隊の2人の上手さもあるけど、中田さんのギターの腕が凄かったからだよな…。と言うか椿屋の演奏レベルが段違いで良い、上手すぎる。小寺さんのドラムめっちゃ好きだし隅倉さんのベース最高〜！！ギター紹介あったけど名前よく聞こえなくて後で調べたらカトウタロウ氏だった…！！今あんなロングヘアーなんだ…！中田さんの「久しぶり！実家に帰ってきました！今日はUKPROJECT時代の曲だけやります！」を聞いた時は流石に嘘ー！？って声出た笑 本当に懐かしい曲ばかりで胸が締め付けられる…。成れの果てヤバかった…。今2025年だよね…？？紫陽花はハンドマイクで歌ってたんだけど本当に歌が上手すぎる…。と言うか20年前の曲を昔と一切変わらない感じで完璧に歌いこなしてるの凄すぎる…。螺旋階段とかテンション上がらない訳ないしその後空中分解ってどんなセットリスト…！？とにかくセットリストがあの頃を過ごした人にはドンピシャ過ぎて…。あと相変わらず中田さんはめちゃくちゃ人気で裕二ー！！ってめちゃくちゃ女性から声掛けあって、その中で男性が「代表！」って呼んだら「代表って言うな！！」って中田さんが言ってたの笑った。まさか2025年に代表呼びする人が出てくるとは…笑 椿屋のお客さんのノリがちょっとビジュアル系(？)みたいな手のノリで面白かったのと最後中田さんが投げキッス(？)して悲鳴上がってたの流石過ぎる。照れが一切ない、ガチのジェントルマンって感じが正に中田裕二そのもの…笑 椿屋観れて良かったな〜って心から思った。
1.群青
2.手つかずの世界
3.成れの果て
4.紫陽花
5.小春日和
7.空中分解
8.幻想
奥(マキさん側)まで行くと帰り絶対すぐ出れないと思ったので出口付近の後方も後方で観る事に。ヘルシンキもちゃんと観たかったんだけど何もかもが面倒くさくなってしまったので位置的に音が良くなくて(これはステージの向きとスピーカーの向きに逆らって立ってる自分が悪い)立ったままほぼ寝てた…。
シロップ始まる前にどデカい声で話してるシロップファン(男の人)が居て、野音のリハでのセンチメンタルが良かったから期待してたのにやらなかったって話をめちゃくちゃ大きい声で話してて(何故かちょっとドヤってるし)その時点で同じファンと思われたくないな…と思ってたらセンチメンタルを大声で歌い出して何なの！？ってなってしまった…。シロップファン以外もいる場所なのに…止めてくれよ…。何か最近シロップファンとテンション合わなくなってきて精神削られる事が多い…。でもこんな事でシロップを嫌いになりたくないよ…。若干テンション下がりつつ定刻でスタート。後ろも後ろなので姿とかは一切見えず。まぁ曲が聴ければ良いので問題なし。
一曲目が生きたいよでビビる。どう言う選曲！？遠藤さんのリクエストとかそう言うやつ？？レア曲過ぎる。ちゃんと演奏出来てるし(こう書くと言い方悪いけど…)生で聴けて嬉しい。
2曲目うつして。大好きな曲。いつ聴いても良い曲だなぁとしみじみ。しかしこの曲の最大の懸念(？)ラストのギターソロをシロップのファン以外にも聴かれると思うと何かそわそわしてしまう…笑 途中(かなり)危なかったけど何とか持ち直していけてた…と思いたいけど、ファン以外が聴いたら事故だったかも…でもこのギター本当に難しいから…と誰にも聞かれてないのに心の中で言い訳してた…笑
3曲目神のカルマ。イエー！！みたいな張り上げる声出してて喉大丈夫！？と思ったけど単発ライブだから大丈夫か…。やっぱやり慣れてる曲は違うね…全体的にまとまってて上手い笑 俺が払う必要はなーい！の後、全然ない！って歌ってた。
4曲目診断書。診断書！？好きな曲だから嬉しい！！1人盛り上がっていた…笑 レミゼの曲これからもライブで沢山やって欲しいよ〜！！ライブで聴くサビのギターとドラムが好き過ぎる…。でも歌詞結構間違えてた…笑
5曲目 sonic Disorder。ソニックか…と思ったけど周りはめちゃくちゃ盛り上がってた。いや全然良いんだけど…正直聴きすぎてお腹一杯なので…20年前から定番曲だし…笑 でもやっぱ長年演奏してるだけあって演奏が完璧(曲の入りとかアレンジも凝ってるし)だから聴いてて安心は出来る…。五十嵐さんが曲始まる所でいえー！！みたいな声張り上げててまた喉が心配になった笑 安定曲だし盛り上がるからセットリスト入りしやすいのかな。
6曲目 負け犬。五十嵐さんが「一番最高の曲やるわ」って言うからフロアも盛り上がって近くに居た人も「いけー！！」みたいな謎の声あげてた(多分センチメンタル歌ってた人…)のに始まったら負け犬で笑った。確かに良い曲だけど…笑 でもこの日の負け犬めちゃくちゃ良かったなぁ、胸にグッとくる演奏だった。ちょっと歌詞忘れしてたけど…笑
7曲目 In the Air,In the Error。好きな曲来た！！！また1人盛り上がる。この曲ライブで聴くの本当に好き！！この曲こそ定番になって盛り上がる様になって欲しい…。曲の完成度も高い感じするしこれからもやり続けてくれ〜！！
8曲目 落堕。ちょっとあっさりめの仕上がり(最初の部分とかラストの辺りそんなに長めじゃなかった)だったけど中畑さんの雄叫も聴けたし(何かロックン…！！みたいな不思議な感じの雄叫びだったけど笑)しかし落堕も曲の仕上がりが抜群に良い…。
アンコールはReborn。こうして聴くと本家めちゃくちゃ良いな…としみじみ思った。正直そんなに好きな曲でもないけど、演奏と言うか曲に多幸感と優しさが溢れてて胸がいっぱいになった。この曲、ずっと悲しい記憶で塗り潰されてたんだけど、こう言う風に感じる事が出来てる今がすごく奇跡であり幸せな事だなと思った。
覚えてるMC
·五「錚々たるメンツの中、初登場の我々がトリをやらせてもらって…良いのかなって思ったり…恐縮です…UKPは年功序列があるようなので…」って申し訳なさそうにしてたの五十嵐さん過ぎる。
·中「UKPROJECTの皆さんいつもありがとうございます。いつも応援してくれている皆さんもありがとうございます」って優しいトーンで言ってくれる中畑さんもすごく中畑さんだなぁと思った。
1.生きたいよ
2.うつして
3.神のカルマ
4.診断書
5.Sonic Disorder
6.負け犬
8.落堕
En.
1.Reborn
初めてUKFC行ったけど、ちゃんと開始時間厳守だしスタッフもしっかりしてて思ってたよりちゃんと楽しめた。UKPは何やかんや自分が好きなバンドが沢山所属してきたけど、寛大で少し緩さのある感じが何処にもない唯一無二でそれは社長が遠藤さんなのが大きいのかなと思っている。遠藤さんには勝手に色々感謝しています。これからも健康に気を付けてお酒は少し控えてもらえると嬉しいです…笑 UKFC15周年おめでとうございます。
🧔♂️ワシ：
「いやぁ、昨日もまたRFC7231読んでてな、
🎙️相方：
「お前の人生、Content Negotiationされすぎやろ！！
しかも向こうから 406 Not Acceptable 返ってきたんやろ！？そらフラれるわ！！」
🧔♂️ワシ：
「この前アーキテクチャ会議で、サービス間通信はgRPCがええって言うたらな、
後輩が「じゃあProtoBufで詩を書きました」言うてきよってな…
message 孤独 { string 心 = 1; } て……」
🎙️相方：
「どんなポエムやねん！！スキーマ駆動の純文学生まれてるやんけ！！
しかもgRPCのくせにRESTに未練残しとるのが切ないねん！！」
🧔♂️ワシ：
「最近の若手、すぐイベントストリームアーキテクチャ導入しようとするけどな、
この前「Kafkaのパーティション分割がバランス悪くて…」って悩んでたから
ワイ真顔で言うたったんや、
そのKafka、輪廻してるでって」
🎙️相方：
再試行失敗したメッセージが前世の因果で戻ってきてるやんけ！！」
🧔♂️ワシ：
全部PlantUMLのシーケンス図でラップバトル表現しとるんや。
オブジェクトが`ー＞+ DJController : Yo！処理呼ぶぜ！`てな……」
🎙️相方：
「お前それ設計書ちゃう、HIPHOPフレームワークやないかい！！
🧔♂️ワシ：
「そんでよく聞かれるんがな、
ワイは即答したったわ。
🎙️相方：
「どんだけ孤独のシャーディングすんねん！！全ノードに寂しさ均等にばら撒くなや！！
最終的にAmazon S3に虚無が永続化されとるやないか！！」
🧔♂️ワシ：
「ちなみに、Terraform書いてる時は瞑想状態に入るのが基本や。
ワイの脳内、こんな感じやねん。
🎙️相方：
しかもリソース作られへんのやろ！？Error: Too many imposter syndrome とか出るんやろ！？」
🧔♂️ワシ：
「最後に言わしてくれ。
ワイ、今でもたまに聞こえるねん。
昔のMonolithが言うてくるねん……
「クラス肥大化してごめんな…でも全部まとめたかったんや…」って」
🎙️相方：
「それフレームワークじゃなくて未練ワークやんけ！！
責務の分離ができへんのは、気持ちの整理もできへんのと一緒や！！」
🧔♂️🎙️二人：
「ソフトウェアアーキテクト、それは正気と狂気の境界で踊る設計のシャーマンや！！」
「ほなまた、次のデプロイで会おうや！！」
おう、Fraud detection 開発してるって？ そりゃご立派だな。で、具体的にどんな開発してんだ？ 口だけじゃねぇよな？ ほら、質問浴びせるぞ。 答えられねぇなら詐欺師はお前だな？
答えられねぇなら、「Fraud detectionやってます」なんて二度と言うなよ？
Let’s face it: starting a conversation on a dating app can feel terrifying. You see someone you’re interested in, you type out a message, and then… you delete it. “Is this too boring?” “Will they even respond?” “What if I sound awkward?”
We’ve all been there. That first message can make or break your chances of connecting with someone amazing. But here’s the good news: you don’t have to overthink it. With the right opening line, you can spark a conversation that feels natural, fun, and meaningful.
At MixerDates, we believe that every great connection starts with a great conversation. That’s why we’ve put together this guide to help you craft the best dating app opening lines—ones that stand out, show your personality, and lead to real connections. Ready to ditch the “hey” and start making an impact? Let’s dive in!
[:contents]
Before we get into the best opening lines, let’s talk about why your first message is so important.
Your opening line is your chance to make a great first impression. It’s the gateway to a conversation that could lead to something special. A thoughtful, creative message shows that you’re genuinely interested—not just swiping mindlessly.
Your first message sets the tone for the entire conversation. A boring or generic opener might lead to a dull chat, while a fun or intriguing one can spark excitement and curiosity.
Let’s be real: everyone loves feeling special. When you put effort into your opening line, it shows that you care enough to stand out. And on MixerDates, where we value authenticity and positivity, that effort goes a long way.
Now, let’s get to the good stuff—the best dating app opening lines that actually work. These are divided into categories to suit different personalities and situations.
While the examples above are great starting points, the best opening lines are the ones that feel authentic to you. Here are some tips to help you craft your own:
Reference something from their profile—a photo, a hobby, or a shared interest. It shows you’re paying attention and not just copying and pasting.
Avoid heavy or overly serious topics right off the bat. Keep the tone light and playful to make the conversation enjoyable.
Don’t try to be someone you’re not. If you’re naturally funny, lean into that. If you’re more thoughtful, go for a sincere compliment or question.
“Hey” or “What’s up?” might be easy, but they’re also forgettable. Put in a little effort to stand out.
This gives the other person an easy way to respond and keeps the conversation flowing.
At MixerDates, we’re all about creating a positive, inclusive space where you can feel comfortable being yourself. Here’s why our platform is the best place to put these opening lines into practice:
We welcome everyone, no matter who you are or who you love. Our platform is designed to be a safe space where you can connect with like-minded people.
Our users create detailed profiles that make it easy to find shared interests and craft personalized opening lines.
We encourage our community to be genuine and kind, so you can feel confident starting conversations without fear of judgment or rejection.
Don’t just take our word for it—here’s what one of our users had to say:
“I met my partner on MixerDates, and it all started with a simple message about our shared love for travel. The conversation flowed naturally, and the rest is history. I’m so grateful for this platform!”
While a great opening line can spark a conversation, building a real connection takes more than just a clever message. Here are the key elements to look for when seeking a meaningful connection:
A strong connection starts with alignment on the things that matter most. Do you share similar values, life goals, or visions for the future?
Look for someone who is willing to share their thoughts, feelings, and vulnerabilities—and who encourages you to do the same.
Healthy relationships are a two-way street. Both people should be putting in effort to communicate, plan dates, and support each other.
A true connection allows both people to be themselves without judgment. Look for someone who celebrates your uniqueness and encourages you to pursue your passions.
Communication is the foundation of any strong relationship. A mutual connection thrives on honesty, transparency, and the ability to resolve conflicts in a healthy way.
At MixerDates, we’re here to help you find these key elements in a partner. Our platform is designed to connect you with people who share your values and are looking for the same things you are. Starting a conversation on a dating app doesn’t have to be stressful. With the right opening line, you can spark a connection that feels natural, fun, and meaningful. And at MixerDates, we’re here to help you every step of the way.
So, what are you waiting for? Craft that perfect opening line, join MixerDates, and start connecting with people who value authenticity and positivity. Your perfect match is out there—and they’re just one message away.
Please consider the histroy of humanity from biological perpsecitve and current known fact in nearby universe, which expo-planet (from the Sol system perspective) is most likely to have civlizaed society? Please add percentage next to it in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanet civilization likelihoodを28 秒行う
Evaluating planetary prospects
OK, I’m looking at the likelihood of a civilized society on an exoplanet within our Solar System. I’ll consider biological history and current space knowledge, aiming to identify the most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from our Solar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard's Star, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1, focusing on their habitable zones and available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilized society likelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m noting key exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which have Earth-like characteristics and are in habitable zones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advanced civilizations.
I'm gathering info on planets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, considering factors like magnetic fields, atmospheres, and proximity to G-type stars for their potential to support advanced civilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despite being close and around a red dwarf star, might support life if it has a magnetic field and atmosphere. This makes me think about its potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimating civilization probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculative percentages based on the Drake equation and the lack of evidence for intelligent life.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names and civilization likelihood percentages, grounded in the long timeline of life's evolution, despite the speculative nature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering their star types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advanced civilizations from our solar system's viewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due to its closeness and observational potential, despite concerns about its flare star dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'm focusing on exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, and K2-18b, aiming to chart their likelihood of hosting a civilized society based on current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society, considering Earth's long biological history.
Refining odds
I'm considering the astronomical timeline for intelligent life on Earth, leading me to assign even lower speculative odds for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrary percentages, clearly noting the speculative nature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience's basic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrary percentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculative nature, and ensuring the data is accessible for young audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating a markdown table with speculative percentages for the likelihood of civilized life on exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoretical nature and considering the understanding level of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mapping out a markdown chart with speculative percentages for the likelihood of a civilized society on exoplanets, mindful of the complexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecing together markdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b's reduced civilized life chance due to the red dwarf's activity. This inclusion highlights the speculative nature of the analysis.
Piecing together speculative odds
I’m detailing a markdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanet likelihoods, considering environmental challenges and adding a disclaimer about the speculative nature and lack of evidence.
Piecing together
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b for its proximity and silent star, but I’ll add a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advanced civilizations' hypothetical likelihood.
Assessing civilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligent life on Earth, which suggests that the odds of any habitable planet developing a complex civilization might be as low as a few percent.
Below is a very speculative chart that—based on what we know about Earth’s long, winding path from simple life to a “civilized society” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives some fun, made‑up percentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists have not yet found any proof of life (let alone advanced civilizations) on any exoplanet. These numbers are just playful estimates to help you think about the ideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an Advanced Civilization on Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet Estimated Likelihood of a Civilized Society
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
How Did We (Very Roughly) Guess These Numbers?
Earth’s Example:
On Earth, life began as simple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that built complex societies. This long journey suggests that—even if a planet is in the “habitable zone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilized society might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
This is the closest exoplanet to us. Even though its star (Proxima Centauri) is a red dwarf that sometimes sends out strong flares (which might harm life), its closeness makes it one of our most interesting candidates. That’s why we give it a slightly higher guess (~2%).
These planets are part of a group orbiting a very cool star. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaning one side always faces the star), so the chance of a complex, advanced civilization might be a bit lower.
LHS 1140 b:
This planet is promising in some ways but is a little farther away and around a dimmer star, so our playful estimate is even lower.
All of these percentages are extremely rough guesses based on what little we understand about the conditions for life and intelligence. Scientists use ideas like the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concrete evidence, these numbers remain just for fun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring these ideas—and remember, space is full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equation itself and see if this euqation is acculate or more opition in the equation you will use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation's value
OK, let me see. The Drake Equation isn't a precise formula; it's more of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrial civilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluating its conceptual nature, its uncertain parameters, and its criticism to conclude on its reliability as an accurate predictive model.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mapping out the Drake Equation as a conceptual guide, detailing its parameters, which are often based on estimates or opinions, to evaluate its reliability for predicting extraterrestrial civilizations.
The Drake Equation is a famous formula that was created to help scientists think about the many factors involved in estimating the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy. However, when we look at the equation closely, we see that it is more of a conceptual framework or heuristic tool than a precise, predictive formula. Let’s break down why:
The equation is usually written as:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of those stars that have planetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The average number of planets that could potentially support life per star with planets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of those planets where life actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction of planets with life where intelligent life evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction of civilizations that develop technology that releases detectable signals into space.
𝐿
L: The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals.
Why the Drake Equation Is More of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction of stars with planets), have become better known through modern astronomy.
The parameters related to the development of life and intelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—are based on very limited data. For example, Earth is the only planet we know where life has developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for these factors. This means that the values chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of Possible Values:
Because many of these factors are not well-constrained, if you change one of the more uncertain parameters even slightly, the final estimate for
𝑁
N (the number of civilizations) can vary by many orders of magnitude. This wide range shows that the equation can lead to very different outcomes based on personal or theoretical assumptions.
The Drake Equation was never meant to provide a precise answer. Instead, it serves as a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrial civilizations. It encourages discussion about the relative importance of different factors and highlights where our scientific knowledge is limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate or More Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In the sense of being a strict mathematical model with well-defined inputs and predictable outputs, the Drake Equation is not accurate. Its accuracy is limited by the extreme uncertainties in several of its key parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning the evolution of life and intelligence, are based on opinion, interpretation, and the single example of Earth. Therefore, while the structure of the equation is logical, the numbers you put into it (and hence the final result) are often more reflective of our current opinions and assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equation is a valuable tool for framing the question of extraterrestrial life. It helps scientists and enthusiasts break down a complex problem into smaller, more manageable questions. However, because several of its factors are highly uncertain and subject to personal interpretation, it is more of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of the number of extraterrestrial civilizations.
In summary, while the Drake Equation is useful for thinking about the various factors that might lead to the emergence of a civilization, its outputs should be taken as highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the long history of Sol system and nearby planets and see if there is any possiblites that in one time intelligent life emerged in nearby planets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-human intelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-human intelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligent life forms in the Sol system and neighboring planets, and how this might factor into the equation.
Piecing together possibilities
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligent life, possibly on Mars or Europa, into the Drake Equation for the Sol system and neighboring planets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligent life emerging on Mars or Venus, though Earth remains the only known life-supporting planet in the solar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligent life could have emerged on planets like Mars, Venus, or Europa, and how this possibility aligns with the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligent life on Mars or Venus could intersect with the assumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems to focus solely on Earth-based evolution.
I’m piecing together the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligent life in the solar system. Mars, Venus, and Titan present challenges, but Europa and Enceladus might harbor microbial life.
Please consider the histroy of humanity from biological perpsecitve and current known fact in nearby universe, which expo-planet (from the Sol system perspective) is most likely to have civlizaed society? Please add percentage next to it in the chart
ChatGPT
Reasoned about exoplanet civilization likelihoodを28 秒行う
Evaluating planetary prospects
OK, I’m looking at the likelihood of a civilized society on an exoplanet within our Solar System. I’ll consider biological history and current space knowledge, aiming to identify the most promising candidate.
Identifying potential candidates
I'm considering exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1e, which might suggest they are within or observed from our Solar System.
Assessing potential candidates
I’m evaluating Proxima Centauri b, Barnard's Star, LHS 1140, and TRAPPIST-1, focusing on their habitable zones and available data. The Drake equation might help estimate their civilized society likelihoods.
Identifying promising exoplanets
I’m noting key exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, which have Earth-like characteristics and are in habitable zones. This narrows down the potential candidates for advanced civilizations.
I'm gathering info on planets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1, considering factors like magnetic fields, atmospheres, and proximity to G-type stars for their potential to support advanced civilizations.
Evaluating exoplanet prospects
I'm noting that Proxima Centauri b, despite being close and around a red dwarf star, might support life if it has a magnetic field and atmosphere. This makes me think about its potential.
Charting probabilities
I'm estimating civilization probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e, using speculative percentages based on the Drake equation and the lack of evidence for intelligent life.
I'm crafting a chart with exoplanet names and civilization likelihood percentages, grounded in the long timeline of life's evolution, despite the speculative nature of these figures.
Identifying exoplanet contenders
I’m evaluating exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 e, and Kepler-186f, considering their star types and distances, to gauge their potential for supporting advanced civilizations from our solar system's viewpoint.
Weighing proximity and observation
I'm leaning towards Proxima Centauri b due to its closeness and observational potential, despite concerns about its flare star dynamics. TRAPPIST-1 e, f, or g are also worth considering.
I'm focusing on exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b, Ross 128 b, LHS 1140 b, TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, and K2-18b, aiming to chart their likelihood of hosting a civilized society based on current knowledge.
Assessing exoplanet potentials
I'm gathering speculative probabilities for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, using the Drake equation and current understanding, to better estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society.
Refining speculative probabilities
I’m refining speculative probabilities for exoplanets, including Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e/f/g, to estimate their chances of hosting a civilized society, considering Earth's long biological history.
Refining odds
I'm considering the astronomical timeline for intelligent life on Earth, leading me to assign even lower speculative odds for exoplanets like Proxima Centauri b and TRAPPIST-1 e.
I’m crafting a simplified chart with arbitrary percentages, clearly noting the speculative nature and lack of scientific data, while considering the target audience's basic understanding of the topic.
I’m charting arbitrary percentages for exoplanets, clarifying their speculative nature, and ensuring the data is accessible for young audiences with minimal scientific detail.
Crafting a chart
I’m creating a markdown table with speculative percentages for the likelihood of civilized life on exoplanets, emphasizing their purely theoretical nature and considering the understanding level of an 8-year-old.
Integrating speculative analysis
I’m mapping out a markdown chart with speculative percentages for the likelihood of a civilized society on exoplanets, mindful of the complexity and simplifying for an 8-year-old's understanding.
I’m piecing together markdown for exoplanets, noting Proxima Centauri b's reduced civilized life chance due to the red dwarf's activity. This inclusion highlights the speculative nature of the analysis.
Piecing together speculative odds
I’m detailing a markdown chart for audience-friendly exoplanet likelihoods, considering environmental challenges and adding a disclaimer about the speculative nature and lack of evidence.
Piecing together
I’m leaning towards Proxima Centauri b for its proximity and silent star, but I’ll add a speculative chart ranking nearby exoplanets, noting their advanced civilizations' hypothetical likelihood.
Assessing civilization probabilities
I'm emphasizing the slow emergence of intelligent life on Earth, which suggests that the odds of any habitable planet developing a complex civilization might be as low as a few percent.
Below is a very speculative chart that—based on what we know about Earth’s long, winding path from simple life to a “civilized society” and our limited observations of nearby exoplanets—gives some fun, made‑up percentage chances for a few of our best candidate exoplanets. Remember: Scientists have not yet found any proof of life (let alone advanced civilizations) on any exoplanet. These numbers are just playful estimates to help you think about the ideas!
Speculative Chances of Finding an Advanced Civilization on Nearby Exoplanets
Exoplanet Estimated Likelihood of a Civilized Society
Proxima Centauri b ~2%
LHS 1140 b ~0.5%
How Did We (Very Roughly) Guess These Numbers?
Earth’s Example:
On Earth, life began as simple single‑celled organisms and took billions of years to evolve into a species that built complex societies. This long journey suggests that—even if a planet is in the “habitable zone” (where liquid water could exist)—developing an advanced, civilized society might be rare.
Proxima Centauri b:
This is the closest exoplanet to us. Even though its star (Proxima Centauri) is a red dwarf that sometimes sends out strong flares (which might harm life), its closeness makes it one of our most interesting candidates. That’s why we give it a slightly higher guess (~2%).
These planets are part of a group orbiting a very cool star. Their environments might be challenging (for example, they could be tidally locked, meaning one side always faces the star), so the chance of a complex, advanced civilization might be a bit lower.
LHS 1140 b:
This planet is promising in some ways but is a little farther away and around a dimmer star, so our playful estimate is even lower.
All of these percentages are extremely rough guesses based on what little we understand about the conditions for life and intelligence. Scientists use ideas like the Drake Equation to think about these chances—but until we have concrete evidence, these numbers remain just for fun and imagination.
Enjoy exploring these ideas—and remember, space is full of mysteries waiting to be discovered!
あなた:
Please examine the Drake Equation itself and see if this euqation is acculate or more opition in the equation you will use
ChatGPT
Reasoned about the Drake Equationを6 秒行う
re-examining the Drake Equation
evaluating the Drake Equation's value
OK, let me see. The Drake Equation isn't a precise formula; it's more of a guiding heuristic that tackles numerous uncertainties regarding extraterrestrial civilizations.
Thinking through the Drake Equation, I’m evaluating its conceptual nature, its uncertain parameters, and its criticism to conclude on its reliability as an accurate predictive model.
Understanding the Drake Equation
I’m mapping out the Drake Equation as a conceptual guide, detailing its parameters, which are often based on estimates or opinions, to evaluate its reliability for predicting extraterrestrial civilizations.
The Drake Equation is a famous formula that was created to help scientists think about the many factors involved in estimating the number of detectable extraterrestrial civilizations in our galaxy. However, when we look at the equation closely, we see that it is more of a conceptual framework or heuristic tool than a precise, predictive formula. Let’s break down why:
The equation is usually written as:
𝑁
=
𝑅
∗
×
𝑓
𝑝
×
𝑛
𝑒
×
𝑓
𝑙
×
𝑓
𝑖
×
𝑓
𝑐
×
𝐿
N=R
∗
×f
p
×n
e
×f
l
×f
i
×f
c
×L
Where:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
: The average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy.
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
: The fraction of those stars that have planetary systems.
𝑛
𝑒
n
e
: The average number of planets that could potentially support life per star with planets.
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
: The fraction of those planets where life actually develops.
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
: The fraction of planets with life where intelligent life evolves.
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
: The fraction of civilizations that develop technology that releases detectable signals into space.
𝐿
L: The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals.
Why the Drake Equation Is More of a Guideline Than a Precise Formula
Uncertain Inputs:
𝑅
∗
R
∗
𝑓
𝑝
f
p
(fraction of stars with planets), have become better known through modern astronomy.
The parameters related to the development of life and intelligence—
𝑓
𝑙
f
l
,
𝑓
𝑖
f
i
,
𝑓
𝑐
f
c
, and
𝐿
L—are based on very limited data. For example, Earth is the only planet we know where life has developed, so we have no way to compare or derive a statistically robust estimate for these factors. This means that the values chosen for these parameters are largely subjective estimates or educated guesses.
Wide Ranges of Possible Values:
Because many of these factors are not well-constrained, if you change one of the more uncertain parameters even slightly, the final estimate for
𝑁
N (the number of civilizations) can vary by many orders of magnitude. This wide range shows that the equation can lead to very different outcomes based on personal or theoretical assumptions.
The Drake Equation was never meant to provide a precise answer. Instead, it serves as a way to organize our thinking about what conditions might be necessary for the development of extraterrestrial civilizations. It encourages discussion about the relative importance of different factors and highlights where our scientific knowledge is limited.
Is the Drake Equation Accurate or More Opinion-Based?
Accurate?
In the sense of being a strict mathematical model with well-defined inputs and predictable outputs, the Drake Equation is not accurate. Its accuracy is limited by the extreme uncertainties in several of its key parameters.
Many of the terms in the equation, especially those concerning the evolution of life and intelligence, are based on opinion, interpretation, and the single example of Earth. Therefore, while the structure of the equation is logical, the numbers you put into it (and hence the final result) are often more reflective of our current opinions and assumptions than of robust empirical data.
The Drake Equation is a valuable tool for framing the question of extraterrestrial life. It helps scientists and enthusiasts break down a complex problem into smaller, more manageable questions. However, because several of its factors are highly uncertain and subject to personal interpretation, it is more of a conceptual guide—or even a way to stimulate discussion—than a formula that provides a definitive, accurate prediction of the number of extraterrestrial civilizations.
In summary, while the Drake Equation is useful for thinking about the various factors that might lead to the emergence of a civilization, its outputs should be taken as highly speculative estimates rather than precise measurements.
あなた:
Please also consider the possiblities of non-human intelligent emrgencing from the long history of Sol system and nearby planets and see if there is any possiblites that in one time intelligent life emerged in nearby planets and see this to the equation
ChatGPT
Reasoned about non-human intelligence and the Drake Equationを19 秒行う
Evaluating non-human intelligence
I'm thinking about the potential for non-human intelligent life forms in the Sol system and neighboring planets, and how this might factor into the equation.
Piecing together possibilities
I'm thinking about how to integrate the emergence of non-human intelligent life, possibly on Mars or Europa, into the Drake Equation for the Sol system and neighboring planets.
It's interesting to think about the hypothesis of intelligent life emerging on Mars or Venus, though Earth remains the only known life-supporting planet in the solar system.
Considering other realms
I'm examining if intelligent life could have emerged on planets like Mars, Venus, or Europa, and how this possibility aligns with the predictions of the Drake Equation.
Hmm, I’m thinking about how non-human intelligent life on Mars or Venus could intersect with the assumptions of the Drake Equation, which seems to focus solely on Earth-based evolution.
I’m piecing together the hypothesis of non-human, advanced, intelligent life in the solar system. Mars, Venus, and Titan present challenges, but Europa and Enceladus might harbor microbial life.
匿名で承認欲求満たそうとしてボコボコにされたら「承認欲求激しすぎｗ中二病かｗ」って中学生未満やん
実際に、
どのようなコンテンツを
どのようなクエリで（RESTなのかRPCなのかGraphQLかそれ以外か）
どのようにマッチして
返すAPIを君は作ったの？
承認欲求満たそうよ
Take a good look—this is the LDP. A rotten ship through and through. The hull is riddled with holes, the deck is stacked with decayed planks, and the crew talks big about their voyage while steering aimlessly. They don’t even know where they’re headed—just waiting for the inevitable sinking. And what about the passengers? A chosen few lounge in luxury cabins, sipping on fine drinks, while the rest shiver on the exposed deck, battered by wind and rain. Yet, no one dares to abandon the ship. Why? Because there’s no other vessel in sight.
Those people, they claim, “We are the pillar that upholds this nation.” But that pillar is infested with termites, reduced to nothing but a hollow shell. They mask the stench of decay with flashy decorations and smooth words, and the public, gullible as ever, eats it up. This, too, is part of the sickness afflicting the country.
Defense, the economy, countermeasures for the declining birthrate—they shout these slogans at every turn, but the truth is, they’re all empty promises. Everything they touch reeks of graft, cronyism, and self-enrichment. No matter how much the people suffer, it’s of no concern to them. Every election, they trot out crowd-pleasing phrases, gather the votes, and voilà—the same faces, the same farce, over and over again.
But doesn’t it strike you as strange? Why do we keep boarding this doomed ship? Why is no one speaking up? Watching a sinking ship and doing nothing but praying won’t change a thing. If the ship is broken, we need to build a new one. If no one else will do it, then we’ll have to take the helm ourselves.
LDP, your time is up. No matter how many rotten planks you patch onto this ship, it’s destined to sink. That’s just the way of things.
----------
はてなの匿名ダイアリーの増田になった気分で，作文して．内容は，自民党を腐す感じ．ですます調は禁止．タイトルもつけて．
自民党という名の腐った船 見てくれ、これが自民党だ。まるで腐った船。船体には穴が空き、甲板には腐った木材が積まれ、乗員たちは口先だけで航海を語る。どこに行くのかも知らず、ただ沈むのを待つだけ。乗客たちはどうだ？選ばれた少数は船室で酒を酌み交わし、残りは甲板で雨風に打たれている。それでも、みんなこの船から降りようとはしない。なぜなら他に船がないからだ。 あの連中は言う。「我々こそがこの国を支える柱だ」と。しかしその柱は白蟻に喰われて、ただの見せかけになっている。腐敗臭を隠すために、華やかな装飾を加え、言葉巧みに煙に巻く。それを鵜呑みにする国民もまた、この国の病巣だ。 防衛だ、経済だ、少子化対策だと喚くけれど、その実、中身は空っぽだ。何をやっても中抜き、天下り、自分たちの懐を肥やすだけ。どれだけ国民が苦しもうと、彼らは関係ない。選挙のたびに耳触りの良いフレーズを掲げ、票を掻き集める。そして、気がつけば同じ顔ぶれ。同じことの繰り返し。 でもおかしいと思わないか？なぜこんな船にいつまでも乗り続けているのか。なぜ誰も声を上げないのか。沈みゆく船を見て、ただ祈るだけでは何も変わらない。船が壊れているなら、新しい船を造ればいい。誰もそれをしようとしないなら、俺たちがやるしかない。 自民党よ、お前たちの時代は終わった。いくら腐った木材を継ぎ足そうと、この船は沈む。それが自然の摂理だ。
おｋ．これを英語にして
日本の学者や研究者を名乗る人がYASUKE肯定した結果、それを根拠にして、日本の人種差別主義者ガーとか英語コミュニティでコメントが付いてる一例 ↓
However, a recent, widely shared post from Japanese historian Yu Hirayama argues that Yasuke was indeed granted samurai status by Nobunaga. Hirayama cites Yasuke’s stipend, housing, and sword afforded him by Nobunaga, but acknowledges that Nobunaga’s enemies did not view Yasuke as a samurai.
(しかし、日本の歴史家である平山優氏による最近の広く共有された投稿では、弥助が実際に信長から侍の地位を与えられたと主張しています。平山氏は、信長が弥助に与えた俸禄、住居、そして刀を根拠として挙げていますが、信長の敵対者たちが弥助を侍とみなしていなかったことも認めています)
↓ 対するコメント
racist in Japan and racist in the rest of the world get to work hand-in-hand now
(日本のレイシストと世界のレイシストは、今、手を取り合って働く)
https://www.polygon.com/24204308/assassins-creed-shadows-yasuke-samurai-ubisoft-controversy
フロントエンドにクリーンアーキテクチャとかDDDの考え方入れようとしてみたんよな。
具体的には、外部APIやローカルストレージとのやり取りをlinterで限定したり、業務知識はライブラリに依存しないEntityとしてモデリングしたり、
あと、Service層みたいなの導入して、テストしにくい処理とかは抽象化してDIできるようにしようとした。
テスト時にモックをDIせずにglobalスコープで上書きしたり、コンポーネントがAPIから取得したDTOみたいなデータに直接依存してたり、バックエンドと文化がだいぶ違うなって感じた。
そもそもクリーンアーキテクチャとかDDDってフロントに適用するもんじゃないのか？って疑問も湧いてきた。
バックエンドだとフレームワークに依存しすぎないようにして、例えばSpring+RESTからgRPCに移行なんてのもクリーンアーキテクチャの思想に則って作ってれば規模にはよるけどそこまで大きくならなかったりするけど、
ReactからVueに切り替えるって考えて、どんなに設計頑張っても、それってほぼ作り直しになるだろうし、バックエンドほどのメリットも感じられない気がする。
俺が目指してるのってなんか根本的に間違ってる気もするんだが、どうなんだろうか？
フロントエンドの人教えてー
でも、サンパウロのカーニバルで題材に選ばれたり、ブラジル大使館が侍だと言い切ったりするくらい、
駐日ブラジル大使館 - Embaixada do Brasil em Tóquio
ブラジルのカーニバルに日本が参戦! 2023年のサンパウロのカーニバルでサンバチーム「モシダデ・アレグレ」がチャンピオンに選ばれました。同チームは、日本初の黒人侍弥助の物語を語りながらパレードを行いました。モザンビークで生まれた弥助は1579年に日本に連れて来られ英雄となりました。
---
O Japão no Carnaval do Brasil! A escola de samba Mocidade Alegre foi escolhida campeã do carnaval de São Paulo 2023. A Escola desfilou contando a história de Yasuke, o primeiro samurai negro do Japão. Nascido em Moçambique, Yasuke foi trazido ao Japão em 1579 e tornou-se um herói. Você conhecia essa história?
---
Japan in Brazil's Carnival! Samba group Mocidade Alegre was chosen the champion of the 2023's carnival in São Paulo. The group presented the story of Yasuke, the first black samurai in Japan. Born in Mozambique, Yasuke was brought to Japan in 1579 and became a hero. Did you know this story?
真田広之の『SHOGUN 将軍』で、なぜ黒人が居ないのか？とボヤる程度、英語のコミュニティできゃっきゃやってる界隈がある程度には知名度あるようです。
なので、黒人侍の存在を史実として認めないと、人種差別者扱いされます。そもそも、それを積極肯定している日本の大学教授もいます。(そして、英語圏のメディアに引用されてる)
日本の学者や研究者を名乗る人がYASUKE肯定した結果、それを根拠にして、日本の人種差別主義者ガーとか英語コミュニティでコメントが付いてる一例 ↓
However, a recent, widely shared post from Japanese historian Yu Hirayama argues that Yasuke was indeed granted samurai status by Nobunaga. Hirayama cites Yasuke’s stipend, housing, and sword afforded him by Nobunaga, but acknowledges that Nobunaga’s enemies did not view Yasuke as a samurai.
(しかし、日本の歴史家である平山優氏による最近の広く共有された投稿では、弥助が実際に信長から侍の地位を与えられたと主張しています。平山氏は、信長が弥助に与えた俸禄、住居、そして刀を根拠として挙げていますが、信長の敵対者たちが弥助を侍とみなしていなかったことも認めています)
↓ 対するコメント
racist in Japan and racist in the rest of the world get to work hand-in-hand now
(日本のレイシストと世界のレイシストは、今、手を取り合って働く)
https://www.polygon.com/24204308/assassins-creed-shadows-yasuke-samurai-ubisoft-controversy
While there’s some question as to his exact role, Yasuke was a real person and, as a Japanese scholar has recently pointed out, there’s no doubt that he was a samurai, which is a social status that can encompass a variety of duties.
(弥助は実在の人物であり、日本のある学者が最近指摘したように、彼が武士であったことは間違いない。)
https://metro.co.uk/2024/07/23/ubisoft-apologies-assassins-creed-shadows-doesnt-say-21281545/
しかも、その影響範囲は大きく、ご先祖様が武器を持ったことがあればみんな武士(侍)の子孫だし、新しい武士(侍)の定義を知らなければ、日本人は人種差別者と誹りを受ける。
羽振りのいいヘッジファンドくらいの高給を払わず、やりたい人の情熱と能力と使命感と倫理観だけに全てお任せしてしまった日本国民の自業自得なんでしょうかね？
（ゆうて、現状もだいたいの日常の困難は消えるレベルの高給は払ってるんですけどね・・・)
なので、肌の色が濃いキャラクターや、顔立ちの異なるキャラクターが登場する現代劇やフィクションの時代劇はもっと増えてほしいです。
日本の学者や研究者を名乗る人がYASUKE肯定した結果、それを根拠にして、日本の人種差別主義者ガーとか英語コミュニティでコメント付いてる例
However, a recent, widely shared post from Japanese historian Yu Hirayama argues that Yasuke was indeed granted samurai status by Nobunaga. Hirayama cites Yasuke’s stipend, housing, and sword afforded him by Nobunaga, but acknowledges that Nobunaga’s enemies did not view Yasuke as a samurai.
(しかし、日本の歴史家である平山優氏による最近の広く共有された投稿では、弥助が実際に信長から侍の地位を与えられたと主張しています。平山氏は、信長が弥助に与えた俸禄、住居、そして刀を根拠として挙げていますが、信長の敵対者たちが弥助を侍とみなしていなかったことも認めています)
↓ 対するコメント
racist in Japan and racist in the rest of the world get to work hand-in-hand now
(日本のレイシストと世界のレイシストは、今、手を取り合って働く)
https://www.polygon.com/24204308/assassins-creed-shadows-yasuke-samurai-ubisoft-controversy
While there’s some question as to his exact role, Yasuke was a real person and, as a Japanese scholar has recently pointed out, there’s no doubt that he was a samurai, which is a social status that can encompass a variety of duties.
(弥助は実在の人物であり、日本のある学者が最近指摘したように、彼が武士であったことは間違いない。)
https://metro.co.uk/2024/07/23/ubisoft-apologies-assassins-creed-shadows-doesnt-say-21281545/
この炎上の根本原因は、アジア人蔑視、アジア人の透明化、そして日本文化の軽視だろ
実際のところ、『アフロサムライ』や『キンバリー』、Netflixの『弥助』、『Rise of the Ronin』のような時代劇ゲーで主人公を黒人にできるオプションなどは、
だから、この問題を『主人公が黒人であること』だと逆張りでミスリードするのはやめろ
つか、増田はいつもの逆張りでも、ガチで『サムライの中には黒人もいたはずだ』『白人によって歴史が消された』『もしかしたら日本にもいたかもしれない』と
信じてる人たちもいるわけ。それは長年にわたり、一部の人々の間で下記の言葉が信じられて来たからだ
For a Samurai to be brave, he must have a bit of black blood
この言葉や歴史観は、子ども向けのウェブサイトや書籍、教師向けの資料にも掲載されてたりする
これは、一部の人が司馬遼太郎の作品を事実として信じているのと似た現象なんだけど、アメリカの黒人公民権運動で利用されてきたっていう歴史がある
そのため、本心で下記みたいになる人もいる
Where Are The Black People in 'Shogun'?
このような人々のさらなる誤解をさらに深めるような無意味な逆張りはやめろ
anond:20240724130753 anond:20240724183209 anond:20240724193537 anond:20240724215021 anond:20240724215021
anond:20240724211603 anond:20240726211114
追記があったので。キミがnoteで逆張りをおやんなさいanond:20240726185220
